(jewellery) criticism?

The September issue of Texte zur Kunst (one of the world leading magazines for contemporary art) reflects on the current state of criticism.

‘The end of art criticism has been predicted for quite a while now. As far as we can see, the dilemma, however, is not that criticism is no longer possible or can no longer be articulated, but that the will to engage in debates within art criticism is lacking. But for what purpose should art criticism be formulated, if not primarily to enhance its own discourse? In the best case, art criticism is an open process in which contentious voices are continuously involved in negotiating the possibilities, principles, and questionable aspects of artistic production. In view of this ideal, we call for bringing contention and dispute back to the centre of art criticism, to force it to engage in a serious debate. Dissent in art critique and in the debate on art in general is absolutely necessary to time and again determine its conditions and the criteria of one’s own judgments. We are simultaneously interested in contentious positions and latitude for art-critical and artistic practices, in which one thing above all is revealed: Critique and, connected to it, dispute are essential—and feasible. ’

We advice to read the issue (we still have to do so ourselves) and we’ll continue this important debate later on. We think that critique, intended in the sense above mentioned, should happen continuously in the jewellery field, and not only within school or larger educational settings, but publicly through a variety of voices, to extend and stimulate the potentials and development (and even construction of a larger audience) of the discipline itself.